[F87source]

Introduction:

So in this product review I will be taking a look at the Turner Motorsports carbon fiber corner braces for the: 2016-2018 Bmw m2; and 2 series, 3 series, and 4 series cabriolet models, and why this is the best corner brace on the market. Before we begin I must thank ECS tuning/Turner motorsports for giving me the brace for this review and all of the individuals from marketing and engineering that I have spoken to and have assisted me in making this review, and of course for being extremely patient with me during the making of this review (which did take nearly a month to complete) however I will be as unbiased as possible despite this.



Disclaimer:

Damage/Injury Disclaimer: Any technical advice, installation instruction, or product installation is done so at your own risk I will not be responsible for personal injuries, injuries to others or any living being, or any damage to your car, or any property damage.

Monetary disclaimer: I do not make comission, or profits of any kind of monetary gain from the sale of this product.



Credits:

Images and videos used in this review are all property of their rightful owners as credited below each image, I am just using them for the purpose of this review but if you (the owner of the image) would like them removed please let me know via pm. Otherwise thanks to the owners (I made sure to credit your online name and link where I found the photo) of the photos, without you this review would be so much more bland.



Quick intro/summary for those of you that don’t like long articles:

So a quick summary of this review is that cars are made of thin sheets of stamped steel that is suceptible to flexing, this flexing can occur on the front end of the vehicle and strut towers. Flex in these regions affect suspension settings (camber, toe, caster etc) and negatively affects handling and steering feel (so if you have expensive coil overs or a nice handling bmw its potential is wasted), chassis bracing can help solve this issue. The Turner motorsports carbon fiber corner braces are the best choice on the market because: they are the cheapest option available, utilizes 6k 5HS carbon fiber which has been selected for its incredible tensile strength and rigidity (multiple times stronger and more rigid compared to: chromoly, stainless steel, aluminium and even titanium), while also having a 2x2 twill carbon fiber finish externally for looks, and these braces were also tested to 30 kN of force (~2x the curb weight of the m2) and did not even fail. The braces also address common issues with carbon fiber - yellow and bonding failures to other materials (metal) and will not suffer from these issues. The braces also include excellent replacement hardware as well, so you do not have to worry about using the silver factory bolts.


Table of contents:

1) Shipping and customer service

2)Why buy a corner brace?
a) So what is chassis flex
b) Why is chassis flex bad?
c) Why don't I just keep the oem brace or get a strut tower brace instead?
d) summary

3) Introducing the Turner Motorsports carbon fiber carbon braces
a) Aesthetics
b) Fitment
c) Included Hardware
d) Price

4) Why the Turner motorsports brace is THE best brace on the market
a) Material choice
i) Weave
ii) Strength
iii) UV resistance

b) Addressing common concerns and Testing
i) Bonding
ii) Extensive testing


5) Hood adjustments

6) Concluding Remarks



Shipping and customer service

I would like to start by dicussing the experience I had with shipping and customer service. Shipping speeds were incredibly quick from Ohio to Canada, packaging was good with the braces being wrapped in multiple layers of foam and enclosed in a thick cardboard box. Communication was prompt and clear. Overall another exceptional experience with Turner motorsports no complaints from me.



Why buy a corner brace?

So a question that pops up when discussing corner braces is why should you buy one? Well there are 2 answers, one short and one long. The short answer is aesthetics, these carbon fiber braces look fantastic in any engine bay and really complement all the other detailed parts that you may have already done (aluminium cap covers, specialized bolts, etc) so why keep those ugly stamped steel stock braces or spend thousands retrofitting the oem m2c/m3/m4 carbon brace (which imo has inferior carbon quality compared to this) when you can spend significantly less on these? The longer answer is chassis flex.


So what is chassis flex?

Chassis flex is an undesirable characteristic that occurs in cars due to the impossibility of any material to be infinitely rigid. This is especially prevalent on modern day cars where cost, fuel economy and thus weight is a large focus in the design of the car, and so cars are made from thin sheets of stamped steel (which itself doesn't have the highest levels of rigidity) to meet these demands. When these thin stamped steel chassis's are then subjected to the load of the car's weight and typical forces from driving (like bumps) and cornering (even more so when large cornering loads are applied - which is fairly common on sports cars and especially M division cars like the m2 which were built for track usage) the thin stamped steel chassis cannot resist deformation due to its low rigidity and thus causes flexing of the chassis. In order to better picture the chassis flexing think about the forces that act on the car, these are the typical 5 forces that can act on a structure as commonly discussed in mechanical engineering classes:


Credit: CAD Community Classroom: https://www.cadavies.com/forces-acti...tructures.html



Credit: CAD Community Classroom: https://www.cadavies.com/forces-acti...tructures.html


a) compression (when you brake the chassis is compressed in the opposite direction of travel as the braking force is transferred from the tires to the entire car)
b) tension (on a rear wheel drive car when you reverse you pull the chassis backwards)
c)bending (when you creast a hill rapidly and you feel the car go light before it hits the ground again bottoming the suspension)
d) torsion (hitting a bump or curb with one wheel lifting only one corner of the car up more than the rest or cornering extremely hard)
e) and shear forces (hitting a speed bump with both front tires, so the front of the car wants to go up while inertia due to the car's weight resists the rear end going up as well).

In this review we will mostly focus on chassis flex to the front end of the car, in particular what bmw calls the wheelhouse/engine support section of the chassis.


Credit: BMW ETK


Why is chassis flex bad?

The common question that follows after learning about chassis flex is "why is chassis flex bad?" or "aren't cars designed to flex and aren't suspensions engineered with chassis flex in mind so it is perfectly acceptable to retain?"

Well the answers to these questions are as follows:

a) chassis flex is bad because suspension alignment angles (camber, toe, caster) and spring rates can be altered when your chassis flexes - in particular the strut towers and the engine bay chassis beams where everything mounts to. This means your suspension is no longer functioning as it should and you are losing the full potential of your cars suspension, this means your expensive well handling bmw or any expensive coil over kit you may have is unable to fully perform as it could/should - meaning you aren't getting what you are paying for.

Chassis flex can also alter steering characteristics and dampen/ruin steering feel when the front suspension's alignment angles are affected. This has been reported to be true on the non-M (M's have significant chassis bracing and stiffening plates that make the impact of a strut tower brace less prominant albeit users still report a gain in steering feel because the stock strut tower braces are extremely flimsy - as we will see later) F series bmw's, as a strut tower brace can vastly increase the steering feel of the car as reported by a large number of owners.


As you can see in the following GIF's from ultra racing the chassis (in this particular review we will focus on the strut tower braces and front chassis beams that everything in the engine bay mounts to) can flex while hitting bumps (first GIF) and cornering (second image). This throws off suspension angles and negatively affects the handling characteristics of the car.



Credit: Ultra racing: https://ultraracing-usa.com/bmw-n55-...trut-2-points/


Credit: Ultra racing: https://ultraracing-usa.com/bmw-n55-...trut-2-points/


b) The second answer is no, cars themselves and their suspensions are not engineered with with chassis flex in mind. Why? Because the complexity involved in determining the amount of flex a chassis, the type of flex the chassis will have (the 5 forces discussed above) will have, how flex changes based on temperature, weight of the car, load the car is subjected to, what is inside of the car and where it is located in the car, how that changes suspension geometry, and how to make this all play well with the suspension is so incredibly complex it is neigh impossible. The proof is shown when the m2 is utilizing a significant amount of the m3 and m4's suspension components, yet it's chassis is significantly different meaning different flex characteristics - how can the suspension be engineered for chassis flex in this instance? It is far simpler to just increase structural rigdity of the car in order to eliminate/mitigate chassis flex and allow the suspension to take care of handling, because determining spring rates vs. weight, temperature and varying loads is significantly easier than accomodating the flex of the entire car. You may also hear the terms "increased torsional rigidity by ___% over the previous generation" or "increased structural rigidity" or manufacturers increase the amount of bracing on the sportier models over the base models of their cars (the m2 has significantly more structural bracing vs. the m235i), this is further proof chassis flex is not desireable and not a deliberate part of a suspension's engineering.


Here are the images showing the constant battle by bmw to increase chassis stiffness and reduce chassis flex further proving that chassis flex is undesirable:


Credit: Bmw m2 technical training documents


Credit: Bmw m2 technical training documents


Credit: Bmw m2 technical training documents


Why don't I just keep the oem brace or get a strut tower brace instead?

The reason you should consider upgrading the oem corner braces is because they are made of extremely thin stamped steel and thus are extremely flimsy and honestly imo don't offer a great improvement in torsional rigdity or bending rigidity at all. Here are two videos showing you that I can easily flex the brace with a couple of fingers - both while bolted to the car and torqued to spec, and while it is removed and sitting on the ground. I couldn't embed the videos so here are 2 share links:

View post on imgur.com

Credit: F87Source

View post on imgur.com

Credit: F87Source


So as you can see the stock brace is extremely flimsy and there is alot more to be gained with an upgraded brace, infact the turner motorsports brace is so stiff I couldn't even bend it at all and hence why I don't have a flex video for that.



In terms of a strut tower brace, that too would be a great upgrade for this car, however it would not address all of the chassis flex in the wheel box area of the car (as referred to above) since it only bolts to the strut tower. So a corner brace upgrade would be the best of both worlds as it not only bolts to the strut tower helping secure it from flexing, but also it bolts to the chassis helping secure the wheel box area from flex. So you essentially get a two for one in terms of bracing.



Summary

So in summary chassis flex negatively affects suspension angles and steering feel preventing you from reaching the full potential of your expensive well handling bmw or expensive new coil over kit. A cheap and aesthetically pleasing solution to stiffen the chassis (both strut tower and wheel box) and to improve steering feel is with the turner motorsports corner braces!


Here is a video from Engineering Explained talking about the flexing in the strut tower and how bracing can help if you want to learn more:

Credit: Engineering Explained




Introducing the Turner Motorsports carbon fiber carbon braces



Credit: F87source


Credit: F87source


Disclaimer: You may notice I am reusing the stock bolts for this brace, and the reason why is because I remove the braces alot to access the intake and other parts of the engine bay and so I end up dropping bolts alot. I found that with the aftermarket bolts I would end up losing washers because they were not attached to the bolt itself, and that became a pain to try and locate the washers so I decided to live with having bolts that were a bit ugly being silver but not lose washers.


Aesthetics

Lets begin by going over the aesthetics of these carbon fiber braces. When I first recieved these braces and took them out of their packaging I noticed that the finish on these braces were absolutely perfect. There was no marks or deep scratches in the clear coat, and there was no bumps in the clear coat due to over spray. The aluminium brackets were perfectly anodized and there was no chips in their coatings either. The braces were absolutely flawless. The hardware (bolts and washers) were also individually wrapped in plastic as well, and like the braces they were flawless too - no chips or scratches on their corrosion resistant coatings.

The carbon fiber weave itself was also perfect, the weave was uniform, consistent, and did not show any signs of fraying fibers or poor overlaps - which is known to happen even on bmw's M performance carbon parts (for example the m4's carbon fiber brace). The bonding between the carbon and aluminium were also flawless and had no gaps or abnormalilties. This also applies in the bends and contours of the brace where it is notoriously hard to perfectly lay the prepreg carbon fiber sheets perfectly, and yet the turner motorsports brace is perfect even in these regards.


Here is an image from an f80post thread complaining about the defects in bmw's m4 carbon brace weave:


Credit: Tyrolean: https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1061204



Here are some images show casing the brace, it's carbon fiber weave, the mounting brackets, and compared to the oem brace:


Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Fitment

The next thing that I would like to go over in this review is the fitment of the Turner motorsports carbon fiber braces is the fitment. I have one word to describe this and that word is precision. Every single facet of this brace is dialed in absolutely down to the milimeter, every bolt hole lines up just perfectly with the car and is exactly the size same size as the bolt that would be used. The hole for the washers are also exactly the same size as the stock washers and fit perfectly. So from my experience fitment was absolutely perfect, there were no real issues with fitment so that allieviated my concerns. However I would like to note that there should be a bit more tolerance on the bolt holes incase there are variations between car to car, as some bolts on my car came close to hitting the hole. I have noted this to Turner motorsports and I hope they will make the bolt holes a bit bigger (like bmw's brace holes which were significantly larger - particularly the last hole on the radiator support which was over 1/2" wide) incase there are variations car to car. But this is just me being extremely finicky and nitpicking, and it isn't really an issue.



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source



Included Hardware

Next we examine the included hardware with the Turner motorsports carbon fiber braces, I am including this section because of the large amount of misinformation I encountered when doing the review for the magnetic drain bolt regarding bolt specifications (particularly how if a bolt isn't exactly the rated size it will cause damage - this is not the case as there is actually a tolerance range. So I am measuring every single bit of hardware to ensure it all falls within spec and anyone having concerns will have their concerns eased). The factory 13 mm hex BMW bolt and washer combination were 3 shorter m8 x 1.25 x 20 and grade 8.8 zinc coated steel bolts and 1 longer m8 x 1.25 x 27 zinc coated steel bolt (the etk doesn't specify the grade of bolt but mine were labeled grade 10.9) per brace - item 15 and 29: https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/sho...diagId=51_8381.

Turner motorsports includes:

- 8x Black Ultra-Corrosion-Resistant Coated Steel Washer For M8 Screw Size, 8.4 Mm ID, 16 Mm OD - EACH
- 6x Black Ultra-Corrosion-Resistant Coated, M8 X 1.25 Thread, 20mm length and grade 8.8 steel (13 mm hex)
- 2x Black Ultra-Corrosion-Resistant Coated, M8 X 1.25 Thread, 50mm length and grade 8.8 steel (13 mm hex)

So the bolts turner motorsports includes are extremely high quality corrosion resistant washers and bolts that are of the appropriate diamater, thread pitch and grade (they also utilize the same 13 mm hex so no new tools will be needed). The notable exception are the 2 longer bolts which are longer and a lower grade of steel, to address this I have done extensive observation and testing on these particular bolt holes and have found that these holes are perfect through holes and do not bottom out, the holes are also quite deep and the entirety of the 50 mm bolt can thread all the way in without hitting anything so the longer length is not an issue. The spacer on the turner motorsports brace is also not as thick as the stock brace so if you choose to use the stock bolt they will thread in the appropriate length as well - so no worries there either.



Credit: F87source

The stock long bolt sticks out 13.88 mm in the stock brace.



Credit: F87source

The stock long bolt sticks out 18.72 mm in the turner brace, showing that the bracket is not too thick for use with stock hardware (while on other holes like the strut tower you can see or feel the stock bolt thread through the hole verifying proper thread engagement depth was achieved).



Credit: F87source



Credit: F87source


These two images show that the long bolt is a through bolt and doesn't risk hitting anything or bottoming out early, so the longer nature of the turner bolt is not a concern.




In terms of the lower grade of the longer bolt I don't forsee it to be an issue because the walls of the female threads on the car's chassis is quite thin, and I think it would fail long before the bolt ever did. However it would be nice if turner motorsports upgraded these to grade 10.9 to match the original bmw bolts.


Now here are some images show casing the original hardware vs. the turner motorsports hardware - I have also measured all of the lengths and thread pitches to confirm consistency with the specifications given. Here is a link discussing the tolerance range for metric bolts as per ISO 965: https://fullerfasteners.com/tech/thr...rews-and-nuts/



Longer bolts:


Credit: F87source

As you can see the long bolt from turner is 7.89 mm wide and within the tolerance range to be considered an m8 bolt



Credit: F87source

Bmw's long bolt is 7.93 mm wide and again is within the acceptable tolerance range.



Credit: F87source

Thread pitch of bmw's long bolt was again confirmed to be 1.25mm as per my thread pitch gauge and here you can see how the oem bolt fits into my gauge.



Credit: F87source

Here is the thread pitch of the Turner motorsports long bolt and again it fits perfectly into my 1.25 mm thread pitch gauge showing that these bolts are indeed 1.25 mm in pitch and will not cause damage to the car



Credit: F87source

Here we can see the hex of the turner long bolt is exactly 13.01 mm and is within the tolerance range for a 13 mm socket.



Credit: F87source

Here is the measurement of the bmw long bolt's hex and it is 12.88 mm and again in the tolerance range for a 13 mm socket.



Credit: F87source

Here is the length of the turner motorsports long bolt and it is 49.42 mm and esssentially the 50 mm exactly as advertised. I did not measure the length of the bmw bolt as the washer made it difficult to do so.


Short bolts:


Credit: F87source

The turner short bolt is 7.93 mm wide and is within the acceptable tolerance range of an m8 bolt



Credit: F87source

The bmw short bolt is 7.85 mm wide and is also wihtin the acceptable tolerance range of an m8 bolt




Credit: F87source

Here is the bmw short bolt and it perfectly fits in the 1.25 mm thread pitch gauge



Credit: F87source

Here is the turner short bolt and again it fits perfectly in the 1.25 mm thread pitch gauge confirming its pitch to be an m8 bolt




Credit: F87source

The turner short bolt has a hex measuring in at 12.95 mm and again is within the range for use in a 13 mm socket.



Credit: F87source

The bmw short bolt has a hex head measuring 12.83 mm wide and is suitable for use with a 13 mm socket




Credit: F87source

Here is the length of the turner short bolt and it is 20.19 mm long verifying it is indeed a 20 mm bolt as advertised. I again couldn't measure the length of the stock bolt due to the washer.



Washer:

Credit: F87source


Credit: F87source


Credit: F87source

The washer was measured to have: 15.88 OD x 8.49 mm ID x 1.55 mm thickness and matches the specification provided by turner motorsports and is also the exact size specified for m8 bolts.



Overall you can see the turner motorsports hardware was as specified, within spec of an m8 bolt and washer, and safe to use on your car - no need to be worried here.



Price

Finally I would like to discuss the price of these braces, coming in at $612.95 MSRP and often discounted down by 10% (so $551.66) these braces are significantly cheaper than the competition (RKP is $1k, other carbon corner braces are $700, a Japanese made aluminium brace is $1k) while offering what may be significantly better performance (as we will discuss in the engineering section). This makes the Turner motorsports carbon fiber corner braces the best option on the market price wise and likely performance wise as well, so just this factor alone makes it hard to justify buying any other brace.



Why the Turner motorsports brace is THE best brace on the market

In this section I will go over the reasons why I believe the Turner motorsports carbon fiber braces are the best corner braces on the market based on the engineering of the brace.


Material Choice

The first reason why I believe these are the best braces on the market is due to its utilization of carbon fiber, a material known for it's incredible strength, rigidity, corrosion resistance, beauty (when done right) and light weight. This makes the brace not only aesthetically pleasing but also incredibly strong and light.


Weave:

Turner motorsports informed me that they use a 2x2 twill weave of carbon fiber just for the external cosmetics, and internally they use 6k 5HS carbon fiber for the structural base of the brace. This means you get the traditional carbon fiber look that we all know and love (because 2x2 twills are extremely widely used for cosmetics and not out right strength) and matches many other carbon fiber parts that you may already have like lips and spoilers. Then the 6k (meaning 6,000 fibers per tow of carbon fiber - with the larger fiber count meaning wider weaves and also more rigidity but less formability, albeit rigidity is more influenced by the orientation of the carbon fiber) 5 harness stain weave (5HS) provides the excellent formability for the internal structure as well as the immense tensile strength and rigidity of the brace. Turner has also informed me that their brace is hollow without the use of foam cores, adding to a lower weight.


So overall the carbon choice used by Turner motorsports were precisely chosen to provide strength while not sacrificing on aesthetics and vice versa. Turner has also informed me that they layed out their fibers in such an oritentation and thickness to ensure their braces are strong in all directions but they will not elaborate further on this as it is their trade secret - and this is understanable. This is something that is not always taken into account by manufacturers who only use a single weave type for aesthetics rather than strength and do not care about how the sheets of carbon are laid in order to save on developmental costs, then rely on the name "carbon fiber" to associate it with being strong - but in reality not all carbon fiber is the same (for example the open pore carbon fiber on the m2's trim is not exactly what you'd call extremely strong, or the twill carbon fiber lips and spoilers are so thin and flexible not something you'd want to use for bracing).


Now here are some images demonstrating the differences in the fibers used in this brace:


Here is an image of what a 2x2 weave pattern looks like, as you can see it is the typical carbon fiber look many of us are acustomed to:


Credit: Elevated materials: https://www.elevatedmaterials.com/ca...y-to-use-them/



And here is an image of what a 5HS weave looks like:


Credit: Elevated materials: https://www.elevatedmaterials.com/ca...y-to-use-them/



Strength:

Now we move onto strength of these carbon fiber braces vs. the common material choices that could be used as alternatives:

1) 6k 5HS carbon fiber:
The source for this data is a carbon supplier:https://www.fibreglast.com/product/6...rbon_fiber_all

Tensile strength: 610 - 700 KSI (which is Kilopound per square inch) = 4,205.8 Mpa - 4,826.33 Mpa
Tensile Modulous (Young's Modulus or rigidity): 33.6 - 34.9 MSI (million pounds per square inch) = 231.66384504 Gpa - 240.62702953 Gpa

2) Grade 5 titanium (Ti6Al4V which is the most commonly used titanium in industry):
The source for this data is from AZO materials: https://www.azom.com/properties.aspx?ArticleID=1547

Tensile strength: 862 - 1,200 MPa
Tensile Modulous (Young's Modulus or rigidity): 110 - 119 GPa

3) Chromoly steel
The source for this data is from: https://material-properties.org/chro...melting-point/

Ultimate tensile strength: 700 MPa
Tensile Modulous (Young's Modulus or rigidity): 205 GPa

4) Stainless steel grade 304 (a pretty common stainless steel that is both very corrosion resistant and strong):
The source for this data is from Azo material: https://www.azom.com/properties.aspx?ArticleID=965

Tensile strength: 510 - 620 MPa
Tensile Modulous (Young's Modulus or rigidity): 190 - 203 GPa

5) 7075 Aluminium (known for being the strongest grade of aluminium and used in air craft):
The source for this data is: https://www.matweb.com/search/DataSh...bbf43f79c51b7d

Ultimate tesile strength: 572 MPa
Tensile Modulous (Young's Modulus or rigidity): 71.7 GPa



So in summary you can see the 6k 5HS carbon fiber weave that Turner Motorsports uses for their brace is approximately multiple times stronger both in terms of tensile strength and rigidity compared to the other commonly used materials. This makes it the ideal material to use for bracing where strength and rigidity is requied.


UV resistance:

Finally I would like to discuss UV resistance as this is a critical part of protecting the resin in the carbon fiber from uv damage which weakens the structure over time, it also prevents the braces from yellowing and becoming ugly over time. For instance here are images of carbon fiber on the mercedes w13 f1 car yellowing over time due to it not being clear coated or clear coated extremely thinly in a bid to save every gram of weight:


Credit: El_KaPpa: https://www.f1technical.net/forum/vi...&f=12#p1086092

You can see that when the carbon fiber starts to yellow or turn green it is not so appealing anymore, and on our street cars where we are not trying to save every gram this issue should be avoided as best as possible. To do this Turner motorsports has informed me that they utilize a UV resistant 2K automotive grade clear coat, and have a minimum volume solid % requirement and a dry film layer with a thickness of 76.2 microns. On top of that they have ultrasonic gauges that function on non-ferrous materials to check the thickness of the clear coat. So they do take precautions to ensure the quality of this brace.



Addressing common concerns and Testing

Next lets discuss some common concerns and the testing that occurred on this brace.

Bonding:

A critical aspect of composite designs of carbon fiber + a metal, in this case carbon fiber + 6061 aluminium brackets for mounting, is ensuring the metal is bonded properly to the carbon fiber and will not fatigue and fall apart over time (this is a common concern I keep hearing about and was an issue with carbon fiber drive shafts - hence why bmw recalled them on the early m3/m4's).

Again this should not be a concern with the Turner motorsports carbon fiber braces as Turner motorsports have informed me that they have specified a specific resin to bond the aluminium to the carbon fiber, they have also machined the brackets in such a way that proper adhesion is promoted preventing the bond from failing.


Extensive testing:

Finally, I would like to discuss what I believe is the most defining thing that makes these braces the best - the testing that was done on them, afterall theoretical loads of the material is nothing without testing. To that extent I am glad to inform you that Turner motorsports has disclosed to me the testing that they performed on their braces and I am throughly impressed with the results (I also think they should be advertising this on their website). So they performed tensile testing up to 30 kN without failure and based on the results they did not see the need to go further. This is absolutely incredible because 30 kN (when converting to a force using Earth's gravity as the acceleration) is 3059.15 kg or 6744.27 lbs which is almost 2x what the m2 weighs, and at this point I would suspect the bolts and strut tower mounting points to have failed long before the braces do. Again this is testing some other small manufactuers do not do, or do not have the capability to do, and Turner motorsports has done it. This shows that these braces are not all for show and can offer tangile performance and should be considered the best corner braces for the m2.


Hood Adjustments

Finally I would like to wrap this up with hood adjustments, I believe what I am about to describe is an isolated incident on my car because from the factory my hood is indeed installed a bit too far back (hence the large hood gap), and as a result the ridge of the hood just touches the brace (which sits higher than the super thin stamped steel factory brace) and thus caused a small paint chip on the hood, and transferred a small bit of paint to the brace which did wipe off and left no damage. Again I believe this is just related to my car because my hood sits too far back.

As you can see in this image there is a small little paint chip right on the fold of the hood left of the large circular hole, this would have completely cleared the ridge if my hood was further forward like it should have been from the factory.


Credit: F87source


So to fix this issue what I did was slightly raise the hood height, as I did not want to move the hood forward like it should have been from the factory (it would have been the better solution as it would also fix my hood gap) because that would require me to undo the painted hood adjustment bolts which I wanted to avoid (I like how they are untouched and I did not want to mess with them). To raise the hood first you must measure the gap of the black hood stops incase you want to revert it to factory conditions, then you should mark them so you know how many turns to apply.

Here is the hood stop I am talking about, and here is how I marked it (I also made a small mark with a paint pen on the knob itself but it is not visible in the image):


Credit: F87source

Afterwards you can turn the knob counter clockwise to thread it out a bit and thus increase the hood height, you should do the same amount of adjustments to each knob to ensure the hood isn't slanted. Then I put a very thin layer of super lube (you can use tooth paste or anything else, just make sure you spread it really thin no lumps as that will cause you to increase hood height unecessarily) on the part of the brace that hit the hood, this will transfer to the hood if contact still exists letting you know you need to keep increasing the height of the hood. And here is an image of this process:


Credit: F87source


Credit: F87source

After you have determined a height that will prevent the hood from hitting the brace you are done! For me it only took a tiny increase of hood height, maybe a turn of the knob. During this process if you notice your hood latches no longer catch or release properly you may also need to adjust the catch. To do so you can press the two tabs to the left and the right of the black plastic on the catch to release it, this black plastic piece is a retainer to prevent the latch from spinning. After it is released you can turn the latch counter clock wise to increase its length by threading it out, or clock wise to decrease its length by threading it in. You should mark it so you can keep count of how many turns you thread it in or out, for me I marked it with that dot in red (image below).


Credit: F87source


In all likelihood this won't happen to you and you won't need to do this, my case is likely an abnormaility because of how poorly my hood was set from factory, but regardless this is what you need to do to fix it (if of course you don't want to shift the hood farther forwards), if it does happen to you.



Concluding Remarks:

This effectively concludes my review on the Turner motorsports carbon fiber braces and why I believe they are the best choice on the market, please let me know if you have any questions I would be happy to answer them. If you have any products from ECS/Turner you would like me to review please also let me know. Once again thank you to Turner motorsports/ECS tuning for this review opportunity, I would love to work with you guys again.

[F87source]

Reserved for future posts

[M Fifty]

Originally Posted by F87source

So as you can see the stock brace is extremely flimsy and there is alot more to be gained with an upgraded brace, infact the turner motorsports brace is so stiff I couldn't even bend it at all and hence why I don't have a flex video for that.

I think they mostly work in tension?

[PackPride85]

What are your thoughts of these braces vs doing the m4 brace install now that you can pick up the m4 brace for $6-700. I think last thread I saw put total cost of conversion at maybe $1200. Need to go back and find that thread.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by M Fifty

I think they mostly work in tension?

Not quite because the braces themselves are not flat they are curved. So when the strut towers move up and also towards the engine you get: bending, torsional and tensional forces through the brace.

Originally Posted by PackPride85

What are your thoughts of these braces vs doing the m4 brace install now that you can pick up the m4 brace for $6-700. I think last thread I saw put total cost of conversion at maybe $1200. Need to go back and find that thread.

I would still buy these turner motorsports braces and for a few reasons:

1) the labor to install the m4 brace is immense, because you have to change the strut tops out.

2) I think the main part of the m4 brace's performance is not from the carbon fiber boomerang itself but from the aluminum fire wall brace. Why do I think this? Because the carbon brace only has 2 bolts holding it in at the front and a long piece of unbolted carbon going to the back where the aluminum brace is. This means you have a very long section of free moving carbon fiber which is susceptible to flexing. I also looked at the videos of retrofits when you see them bolt down the brace you can see a massive amount of flex. This leads me to believe the bmw brace isn't as rigid as the turner brace maybe due to the carbon fiber that is used combined with the long sections that aren't bolted down meaning a longer area to act as leverage, meaning more flex.

This is why I don't think it's as effective as the turner brace, the part that is good is the large aluminum fire wall brace. However I think if you get the turner braces + a cheap strut tower brace youd easily match and exceed the level of performance the m4 brace gives.

3) whenever you want to do spark plugs or change the intake filter so much needs to be removed in the case of the m4 brace so again it's more inconvenient.

[3LiterBeater]

I always thought it was a tad funny when people posted these chassis brace parts and how they were advertised as improvement to the car. I figured there was no way a chassis as rigid as this could benefit from something like a strut brace with its current bracing. I was very happily proven wrong.

I bought the ST XTA coilovers which allowed for either the standard M3/4 "antler" brace or the standard "V" brace on the N55 M2. Even pulling out of my garage I noticed a huge difference in front axle feel and feedback after adding the aluminum brace to the M2 without the carbon hoop.

Good to know these may also help add some more to the front end.

Great write up

[F87source]

Originally Posted by 3LiterBeater

I always thought it was a tad funny when people posted these chassis brace parts and how they were advertised as improvement to the car. I figured there was no way a chassis as rigid as this could benefit from something like a strut brace with its current bracing. I was very happily proven wrong.

I bought the ST XTA coilovers which allowed for either the standard M3/4 "antler" brace or the standard "V" brace on the N55 M2. Even pulling out of my garage I noticed a huge difference in front axle feel and feedback.

Good to know these may also help add some more to the front end.

Great write up

Thanks!

Tbh I think the stock braces are junk, they're just thin and super flimsy and likely don't add much rigidity to the chassis. So there is honestly alot to gain with a product like this, and I think it's better than the m4 brace too.

[3LiterBeater]

Originally Posted by F87source

Thanks!

Tbh I think the stock braces are junk, they're just thin and super flimsy and likely don't add much rigidity to the chassis. So there is honestly alot to gain with a product like this, and I think it's better than the m4 brace too.

Adding only the aluminum "upper" brace made a significant difference IMO.

Really makes you wonder if that "V" shaped piece originally in there was working at all.

I wonder what these stamped corner pieces were added for if they seem to also do very little

[F87source]

Originally Posted by 3LiterBeater

Adding only the aluminum "upper" brace made a significant difference IMO.

Really makes you wonder if that "V" shaped piece originally in there was working at all.

I wonder what these stamped corner pieces were added for if they seem to also do very little

The V shaped firewall brace is tubular steel so it might be more effective than the corner braces but I'm not sure how much more.

The stock corner braces probably do offer some extra rigidity over nothing. But they're so flexible any upgrade would be better.

[M Fifty]

Originally Posted by F87source

The V shaped firewall brace is tubular steel so it might be more effective than the corner braces but I'm not sure how much more.

The stock corner braces probably do offer some extra rigidity over nothing. But they're so flexible any upgrade would be better.

You should definitely offer your services as a consultant to BMW NA.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by M Fifty

You should definitely offer your services as a consultant to BMW NA.

Unfortunately bmw NA doesn't call the shots bmw AG does, and their engineers are mire than capable of making parts that easily exceed that of what I can come up with. However they're tied to budget constraints and parts sharing constraints between models, so it's simply not feasible for them to do so. This is why the aftermarket exists, to design parts that oem's cannot or will not, and satisfy the craving for more that enthusiasts constantly desire.

[atlas]

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any actual driving impressions?

[F87source]

Originally Posted by atlas

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any actual driving impressions?

You are correct, I will be talking about this in the reserved posts section. I need to drive with it on for longer.

[M Fifty]

Inline:

1) the labor to install the m4 brace is immense, because you have to change the strut tops out. It took a couple of hours either side of lunch using a couple of jacks, a breaker bar and a couple of torque wrenches (plus some slightly out of the ordinary sockets).

2) I think the main part of the m4 brace's performance is not from the carbon fiber boomerang itself but from the aluminum fire wall brace. Why do I think this? Because the carbon brace only has 2 bolts holding it in at the front and a long piece of unbolted carbon going to the back where the aluminum brace is. This means you have a very long section of free moving carbon fiber which is susceptible to flexing. I also looked at the videos of retrofits when you see them bolt down the brace you can see a massive amount of flex. This leads me to believe the bmw brace isn't as rigid as the turner brace maybe due to the carbon fiber that is used combined with the long sections that aren't bolted down meaning a longer area to act as leverage, meaning more flex.

This is why I don't think it's as effective as the turner brace, the part that is good is the large aluminum fire wall brace. However I think if you get the turner braces + a cheap strut tower brace youd easily match and exceed the level of performance the m4 brace gives. I don't think BMW did it to look pretty as the bracing system originally appeared on the M235i Racing. Hence, while your solution is certainly more cost effective, I doubt it is more effective (or as light).

3) whenever you want to do spark plugs or change the intake filter so much needs to be removed in the case of the m4 brace so again it's more inconvenient.
Six bolts isn't so much - even if it is less convenient.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by M Fifty

Inline:

1) the labor to install the m4 brace is immense, because you have to change the strut tops out. It took a couple of hours either side of lunch using a couple of jacks, a breaker bar and a couple of torque wrenches (plus some slightly out of the ordinary sockets).

2) I think the main part of the m4 brace's performance is not from the carbon fiber boomerang itself but from the aluminum fire wall brace. Why do I think this? Because the carbon brace only has 2 bolts holding it in at the front and a long piece of unbolted carbon going to the back where the aluminum brace is. This means you have a very long section of free moving carbon fiber which is susceptible to flexing. I also looked at the videos of retrofits when you see them bolt down the brace you can see a massive amount of flex. This leads me to believe the bmw brace isn't as rigid as the turner brace maybe due to the carbon fiber that is used combined with the long sections that aren't bolted down meaning a longer area to act as leverage, meaning more flex.

This is why I don't think it's as effective as the turner brace, the part that is good is the large aluminum fire wall brace. However I think if you get the turner braces + a cheap strut tower brace youd easily match and exceed the level of performance the m4 brace gives. I don't think BMW did it to look pretty as the bracing system originally appeared on the M235i Racing. Hence, while your solution is certainly more cost effective, I doubt it is more effective (or as light).

3) whenever you want to do spark plugs or change the intake filter so much needs to be removed in the case of the m4 brace so again it's more inconvenient.
Six bolts isn't so much - even if it is less convenient.

1) you'd need spring compressors to also compress the shocks, and there are alot of single use tty bolts to increase the cost as well. Some people may need to also cut and paint their fenders for the brace clearance. So not alot of people may want to do something like this. The turner braces are completely plug and play.


2) I did not say BMWs bracing was to look pretty, it is I deed effective. However I do not believe it is as effective in terms of reinforcing the wheel house area as the turner braces because it doesn't bolt into as many locations. This leaves a longer section if carbon fiber free to move, meaning a longer lever and thus more mechanical advantage on the carbon brace making it more susceptible to flexing - which clear shows on install videos. In terms of wheel house bracing it absolutely is more effective, it is more rigid and bolts into more locations to provide more support. In terms of strut tower reinforcement it might not be as much because the aluminum brace for the f8x brace is incredibly robust, however if you add in a strut tower brace as well like I did, then you solve this issue and create a much better solution than even the stock f8x bmw bracing. Because you now have more robust wheel house bracing that is stiffer and connects to more locations, a connection to the strut tower from the carbon brace, a connection to the strut tower from the factory tubular steel brace, then a super strong strut tower brace for even more support.


In terms of weight I doubt its heavier, these things weigh almost nothing. If it happens to be lighter then bmw made their brace super thin and that's probably a reason why it is more flexible.


Also just because a part is on the m235ir doesn't mean it's absolutely amazing, it's because bmw needed chassis bracing and there were OEM parts to fulfill that need so they don't have to spend alot of money engineering a new one. This doesn't necessarily mean it's the best, for example look at the intercooler used on the m235ir it's the same crappy under sized stock f series n55 intercooler. Same for the cooling system, this is why the m235ir is detuned so it doesn't over heat.


3) 6 bolts + trim covers + a massive brace that you just lit somewhere else to avoid scratching. Whereas almost all jobs besides the coolant tank can be done by removing the driver side corner brace alone which is small and easily stores safely.

[M Fifty]

Noting that this isn't intended as an attack on your purchasing preferences, judgement, political affiliation, sexual orientation, nationality, self identified technical expertise, or prose style, lets try again:

Originally Posted by F87source

1) you'd need spring compressors to also compress the shocks, and there are alot of single use tty bolts to increase the cost as well. Some people may need to also cut and paint their fenders for the brace clearance. So not alot of people may want to do something like this. The turner braces are completely plug and play.Nope. Undo the nut on the top of the front strut (using one of the odd sockets), and lift the car off the strut. Then change the upper mount before reversing the process to refit. Fair point on the single use bolts, but that's cost effectiveness once again - rather than effectiveness.


2) I did not say BMWs bracing was to look pretty, it is I deed effective. However I do not believe it is as effective in terms of reinforcing the wheel house area as the turner braces because it doesn't bolt into as many locations. This leaves a longer section if carbon fiber free to move, meaning a longer lever and thus more mechanical advantage on the carbon brace making it more susceptible to flexing - which clear shows on install videos. In terms of wheel house bracing it absolutely is more effective, it is more rigid and bolts into more locations to provide more support. In terms of strut tower reinforcement it might not be as much because the aluminum brace for the f8x brace is incredibly robust, however if you add in a strut tower brace as well like I did, then you solve this issue and create a much better solution than even the stock f8x bmw bracing. Because you now have more robust wheel house bracing that is stiffer and connects to more locations, a connection to the strut tower from the carbon brace, a connection to the strut tower from the factory tubular steel brace, then a super strong strut tower brace for even more support. Your advocated solution is cheaper new, but I doubt it's more effective overall. If it were - and noting the potentially lower production and installation costs - I really think BMWs structural engineers would have adopted it rather than their chosen solution. Hence, your solution may be more cost effective, but your assertion that it better will need more than just a really long initial post on the subject to justify it. Yes? But as I mentioned earlier, maybe you could offer your services to BMW to show them how they could have done a better job for less.


In terms of weight I doubt its heavier, these things weigh almost nothing. If it happens to be lighter then bmw made their brace super thin and that's probably a reason why it is more flexible. The steel original brace and the extra one you're advocating are not as light as the aluminum part of the bracing system. The CF element in both cases appears to be very light, and very stiff. In the case of the BMW solution it's stiff to the point where the bolts rip out of the front mounts in front end collisions. So, while I see where you are coming from on the unsupported length, it appears to have been designed to overcome this by some margin.


Also just because a part is on the m235ir doesn't mean it's absolutely amazing, it's because bmw needed chassis bracing and there were OEM parts to fulfill that need so they don't have to spend alot of money engineering a new one. This doesn't necessarily mean it's the best, for example look at the intercooler used on the m235ir it's the same crappy under sized stock f series n55 intercooler. Same for the cooling system, this is why the m235ir is detuned so it doesn't over heat.Fatuous. I'm not saying your solution is bad, I'm noting your assertion that it's better has limitations. As noted previously, yours may be more cost effective based on price.


3) 6 bolts + trim covers + a massive brace that you just lit somewhere else to avoid scratching. Whereas almost all jobs besides the coolant tank can be done by removing the driver side corner brace alone which is small and easily stores safely.

Nope. 6 bolts. Trust me. If you really want to you can turn the locking tabs on the trim covers and remove them to give yourself more room to get at the 4 rear bolts.

As to scratches, the floor is generally a good place to rest it, as the shape means that provided you put it down right way up, the CF bits are kept away from any possibility of scratches. Or, it's possible to lean it against a wall if using the floor takes up to much space. HTH

[ZM2]

Please remind me, wouldn't I have to change to M2C/M3/M4 camber plates to use the BMW carbon brace?

And, are you guys able to slide the engine cover on/off when using a traditional strut brace?

[F87source]

Originally Posted by ZM2

Please remind me, wouldn't I have to change to M2C/M3/M4 camber plates to use the BMW carbon brace?

And, are you guys able to slide the engine cover on/off when using a traditional strut brace?

Yes you would absolutely have to change the camber plates to the: M2C/M3/M4
plates to use the bmw carbon brace, because that's what the aluminium brace bolts to.


No you must take off the strut brace to remove the engine cover, this is why you should look for a brace with the bar secured by bolts, so you can remove it without unbolting the strut tower bolts - which are single use tty.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by M Fifty

Noting that this isn't intended as an attack on your purchasing preferences, judgement, political affiliation, sexual orientation, nationality, self identified technical expertise, or prose style, lets try again:

Nope. 6 bolts. Trust me. If you really want to you can turn the locking tabs on the trim covers and remove them to give yourself more room to get at the 4 rear bolts.

As to scratches, the floor is generally a good place to rest it, as the shape means that provided you put it down right way up, the CF bits are kept away from any possibility of scratches. Or, it's possible to lean it against a wall if using the floor takes up to much space. HTH

1) Yes I guess you can do it that way to avoid using spring compressors, I always like pulling the entire shock body. Cost is always part of the consideration if you are deciding on which option, especially when effectiveness is debated. Don't forget cutting of the fenders may also be involved.

2)

- First of all the m235ir and other m cars besides the m2 doesn't have the strut tower mounting points for the corner braces, so it isn't about just adopting it you'd have to change both the front support and weld in the tower support.

- Second you seem to forget the turner motorsports option is brand new, well before the time of the m235ir's creation. This means bmw has to use what they have on hand, and it is either the flimsy corner braces off the cabriolet or the better option that comes with an aluminium strut brace - i.e. the m4 solution. So obviously the choice was clear.

- Next you seem to have misread my response. I said the turner corner braces were much more effective than the carbon boomerang part, but what makes the bmw solution better is the aluminium strut tower brace. Which secures the strut tower from left and right movements as well as attach it to the firewall for forward and back movement.

The Turner solution inconjunction with a strut brace like this tubular steel bar: https://afepower.com/afe-power-450-5...nt-strut-brace

Or any carbon or aluminium brace of your choice if weight is a concern. Will now give even better left and right bracing than aluminium, as well as now giving better bracing forwards and back - because you have 2 items bracing in this direction - the tubular steel stock brace + the corner braces. Then in terms of wheel house bracing the turner corner braces do a better job because they are bolted to the wheel house region by more connections thus reducing the leverage and reducing flex. Look at the install of the oem brace and see the amount of flex when you have such a large unsecured arm. You cannot beat physics regardless of the material.


Lets also not forget upwards movement as the towers flex. The turner braces will help resist this better as they are more rigid from being bolted in in more places, plus there are braces on either side of the strut tower acting as a strap to hold it down. The aluminium brace acts on one side making it a weaker retention on one side. And the fact that you can see the large amount of flexing when it is being bolted down isn't a sign of immense rigidity, it literally makes it look flimsy, because these bolts aren't torqued to immense loads and it was still enough to deform the brace.


You also posted about the brace being able to rip out the threads and destroy the mounts in a crash proving its rigidity. No that is not proof of rigidity, that is proof of the immense shear, bending, and tensile strength of the carbon fiber vs. the thin sheet metal front support it is bolted into. Examine the details and types of forces better if you want to debate rigidity... Which also brings up the point, if the only 2 front mounting points are flimsy stamped steel how is it going to help transfer chassis stresses to the brace to improve rigidity? That's why it is better to bolt into many points vs. fewer.


Like I said before it's not the engineer's fault for not building everything up to top tier spec, it is the budget constraints. You seem to not realize this. Why do you think cars are still stamped steel and not carbon fiber? Why do you think M cars are based off of regular series cars and don't have their own custom chassis which would make performance way better? Why does the m235ir still share the same stock intercooler and cooling? Exactly budget.



- The original steel brace is an extremely simple V shape with a hollow tubular bar, it has one job movement towards the firewall and bumper. It weighs almost nothing. The aluminium brace is a solid one piece design, to get a solid design to have the same rigdity as a tubular design you must add thickness, as that will give more rigidity in the plane of thickness. Then you must designn it to wrap around the strut towers and brace the fire wall adding alot of material and size, this adds alot of weight. Then add in the strut tower brace, again a simple piece of tubular metal (aluminium) or carbon and since it only braces one direction you can make it as simple or complex as you want. The overall package will still be much smaller than the large aluminium brace. I doubt it weighs more than the aluminium brace.


In fact lets do a calculation:

M4 aluminium brace: 2.479kg (https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/par...&q=31127855855)


M2 tubular brace: 1.685 kg (https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/par...&q=51617378711)

Weicher's carbon brace under 750g as per: https://www.escape6.eu/wiechers-spor...f87--id462690/ (cheaper at ecs tuning)

2.436 kg is the total. So it is lighter...... That's not counting the additional pieces that are retrofitted for the alumium brace, you still have strut top reinforcement rings etc.

[M Fifty]

Okay... Well:

Originally Posted by F87source

1) Yes I guess you can do it that way to avoid using spring compressors, I always like pulling the entire shock body. Cost is always part of the consideration if you are deciding on which option, especially when effectiveness is debated. Don't forget cutting of the fenders may also be involved.If you're pulling the shock body, that means the pinch bolt and nut and some additional specialist tools. Which means quite a bit of extra work (and some expenditure) as they are single use.

2)

- First of all the m235ir and other m cars besides the m2 doesn't have the strut tower mounting points for the corner braces, so it isn't about just adopting it you'd have to change both the front support and weld in the tower support.Well, you're going to have to explain that one.

- Second you seem to forget the turner motorsports option is brand new, well before the time of the m235ir's creation. This means bmw has to use what they have on hand, and it is either the flimsy corner braces off the cabriolet or the better option that comes with an aluminium strut brace - i.e. the m4 solution. So obviously the choice was clear.Okay, another one where you've lost me. The M235i Racing appears to predate the M2, so how do the Turner braces predate BMWs solution? It predates the M4 as well.

- Next you seem to have misread my response. I said the turner corner braces were much more effective than the carbon boomerang part,Doubt it - but we can agree to disagree on this one. As part of the overall bracing system I seriously doubt the Turner solution is stiffer overall - even if it is stiffer than the steel corner braces used on the M2 OG and LCI.but what makes the bmw solution better is the aluminium strut tower brace. Which secures the strut tower from left and right movements as well as attach it to the firewall for forward and back movement. Agreed. But it was designed to work with the boomerang.

The Turner solution inconjunction with a strut brace like this tubular steel bar: https://afepower.com/afe-power-450-5...nt-strut-brace

Or any carbon or aluminium brace of your choice if weight is a concern. Will now give even better left and right bracing than aluminium, as well as now giving better bracing forwards and back - because you have 2 items bracing in this direction - the tubular steel stock brace + the corner braces. Then in terms of wheel house bracing the turner corner braces do a better job because they are bolted to the wheel house region by more connections thus reducing the leverage and reducing flex. Look at the install of the oem brace and see the amount of flex when you have such a large unsecured arm. You cannot beat physics regardless of the material. Not buying this one. But, it's your car, so your opinion should be one one that counts for you.


Lets also not forget upwards movement as the towers flex. The turner braces will help resist this better as they are more rigid from being bolted in in more places, plus there are braces on either side of the strut tower acting as a strap to hold it down. The aluminium brace acts on one side making it a weaker retention on one side. And the fact that you can see the large amount of flexing when it is being bolted down isn't a sign of immense rigidity, it literally makes it look flimsy, because these bolts aren't torqued to immense loads and it was still enough to deform the brace. Bollocks. They are nowhere near the towers either from a load pathway or physical location point of view.


You also posted about the brace being able to rip out the threads and destroy the mounts in a crash proving its rigidity. No that is not proof of rigidity, that is proof of the immense shear, bending, and tensile strength of the carbon fiber vs. the thin sheet metal front support it is bolted into. Examine the details and types of forces better if you want to debate rigidity... Which also brings up the point, if the only 2 front mounting points are flimsy stamped steel how is it going to help transfer chassis stresses to the brace to improve rigidity? That's why it is better to bolt into many points vs. fewer.It's ripping out of the carbon brace front brackets, rather than the part they bolt to. So the CF brace and it's front bracket are more resistant to flex than the shear strength of the material the brackets are made from (appears to be anodised aluminium), and the 'thin sheet metal' which - noting this is what both bracing systems attach to. Yes?


Like I said before it's not the engineer's fault for not building everything up to top tier spec, it is the budget constraints. You seem to not realize this. Why do you think cars are still stamped steel and not carbon fiber? Why do you think M cars are based off of regular series cars and don't have their own custom chassis which would make performance way better? Why does the m235ir still share the same stock intercooler and cooling? Exactly budget. If they build a racing version a road car there is always a trade off, even if they are building a GT4 M4. Their trade off is more expensive than your preferred solution. That doesn't make it worse.



- The original steel brace is an extremely simple V shape with a hollow tubular bar, it has one job movement towards the firewall and bumper. Firewall and strut tops. Yes?It weighs almost nothing.No. The aluminium brace is a solid one piece design, to get a solid design to have the same rigdity as a tubular design you must add thickness, as that will give more rigidity in the plane of thickness. Then you must designn it to wrap around the strut towers and brace the fire wall adding alot of material and size, this adds alot of weight. You should weigh them on a like for like basis (unlike what you've posted below), and -and this is the important bit - also measure the force required to flex the chassis with either installed. That way you have solid evidence for your assertion that the original steel item, and your favoured aftermarket strut brace is both lighter and stiffer than BMW's solution. Then add in the strut tower brace, again a simple piece of tubular metal (aluminium) or carbon and since it only braces one direction you can make it as simple or complex as you want. The overall package will still be much smaller than the large aluminium brace. I doubt it weighs more than the aluminium brace.


In fact lets do a calculation:

M4 aluminium brace: 2.479kg (https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/par...&q=31127855855)


M2 tubular brace: 1.685 kg (https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/par...&q=51617378711)

Weicher's carbon brace under 750g as per: https://www.escape6.eu/wiechers-spor...f87--id462690/ (cheaper at ecs tuning)You didn't fit that though did you? How much does the item you fitted weigh as a matter of interest?

2.436 kg is the total. So it is lighter...... That's not counting the additional pieces that are retrofitted for the alumium brace, you still have strut top reinforcement rings etc.

I accept that you like what you bought and are happy with the cost effectiveness trade off vs what BMW came up with. In the meantime, have fun driving your car. HTH

[PackPride85]

Seems like throwing an aftermarket strut tower bar on will do more than either the m4 brace or turner braces on the n55 m2. After that mod I'd be surprised if anyone could feel the difference between either option. In that case I'd probably just get the turner braces.

[M Fifty]

Originally Posted by PackPride85

Seems like throwing an aftermarket strut tower bar on will do more than either the m4 brace or turner braces on the n55 m2. After that mod I'd be surprised if anyone could feel the difference between either option. In that case I'd probably just get the turner braces.

The key thing to remember is that it already has a strut brace - hidden under the trim covers below the windscreen. Noting that BMW have previously sold cars with a very obvious brace between the strut towers, that they've chosen to fit one between the actual strut tops and the windscreen that you can't see without removing some trim - and then haven't sold something to bolt between the towers - suggests the latter is of marginal benefit compared to what they already fitted. But, the Turner braces definitely look well made and are much stiffer than the wriggly tin the stock corner braces are made from, and have the advantage of being both better looking than the originals, and much less expensive than the BMW solution.

Whether they do anything compared to said wriggly tin items - never mind what BMW came up with prior to 2013 for the M235i Racing - is the point of contention in this thread.